CrowdCO-OP: Sharing Risks and Rewards in Crowdsourcing
Shaoyang Fan, Ujwal Gadiraju, Alessandro Checco, Gianluca Demartini
Abstract
Paid micro-task crowdsourcing has gained in popularity partly due to the increasing need for large-scale manually labelled datasets which are often used to train and evaluate Artificial Intelligence systems. Modern paid crowdsourcing platforms use a piecework approach to rewards, meaning that workers are paid for each task they complete, given that their work quality is considered sufficient by the requester or the platform. Such an approach creates risks for workers; their work may be rejected without being rewarded, and they may be working on poorly rewarded tasks, in light of the disproportionate time required to complete them. As a result, recent research has shown that crowd workers may tend to choose specific, simple, and familiar tasks and avoid new requesters to manage these risks.
In this paper, we propose a novel crowdsourcing reward mechanism that allows workers to share these risks and achieve a standardized hourly wage equal for all participating workers. Reward-focused workers can thereby take up challenging and complex HITs without bearing the financial risk of not being rewarded for completed work. We experimentally compare different crowd reward schemes and observe their impact on worker performance and satisfaction. Our results show that 1) workers clearly perceive the benefits of the proposed reward scheme, 2) work effectiveness and efficiency are not impacted as compared to those of the piecework scheme, and 3) the presence of slow workers is limited and does not disrupt the proposed cooperation-based approaches.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 1453f1b8-24ec-40b1-9bde-6024fe53910dCited by top-tier papers9
- The Data-Production DispositifMilagros Miceli, Julian PosadaCSCW 2022 · 117 citations
- Plan-Then-Execute: An Empirical Study of User Trust and Team Performance When Using LLM Agents As A Daily AssistantGaole He, Gianluca Demartini, Ujwal GadirajuCHI 2025 · 91 citations
- Quantifying the Invisible Labor in Crowd WorkCarlos Toxtli, Siddharth Suri, Saiph SavageCSCW 2021 · 91 citations
- Great Chain of Agents: The Role of Metaphorical Representation of Agents in Conversational CrowdsourcingJi-Youn Jung, Sihang Qiu, Alessandro Bozzon, Ujwal GadirajuCHI 2022 · 42 citations
- Documenting Data Production Processes: A Participatory Approach for Data WorkMilagros Miceli, Tianling Yang, Adriana Alvarado Garcia, Julian Posada et al.CSCW 2022 · 28 citations
Related papers
- Dynamic Compensation Can Enhance User Engagement by Triggering Sensitivity to Financial Losses in Crowd-sourced StudiesCatalina Gomez, Mung Yao Jia, Sue Min Cho, Chien-Ming Huang et al.CHI 2026 · 1 citation
- Incentive-Boosted Federated CrowdsourcingXiangping Kang, Guoxian Yu, Jun Wang, Wei Guo et al.AAAI 2023 · 14 citations
- How Low is Low? Crowdworker Perceptions of Microtask Payments in Work versus Leisure SituationsLing Jiang, Christian WagnerCHI 2024 · 2 citations
- Understanding the Microtask Crowdsourcing Experience for Workers with Disabilities: A Comparative ViewAmy Rechkemmer, Ming YinCSCW 2022 · 14 citations
- Sorry, Your HIT Is Overbooked - Investigating the Use of Crowdsourcing HIT CatchersEddy Maddalena, Alessandro Checco, Haoyu Xie, Efpraxia D. Zamani et al.CSCW 2025 · 2 citations
